"Should the Govt amend HMA to ban 'same-gotra' marriage"?

[anilsinghd]

In RatnaKheda Sirsa, a mama eloped with his Bhanji.
They are in Police custody now.
Kapil -
How will court decide in their case that custom doesn't permit this?
What if they will say that they want to follow the Exception provided to South Indians?

They should Convert
Get Married and Call NEO LIBERALS in their marriage
I am sure atleast one jatlander will go for sure to bless bride and groom

Sorry i have not read the full thread , i only have come this far. But i could not stop myself from posting on this. Rakesh , why so sarcastic? The two people who are in some sense contrary to what you believe are Vijay and Kapil and both are against the samegotra marriage , what they are arguing is the method. So its not a case of disagreement of philosophy but more of the implementation, i do not believe that this calls for saracsm at this point.


Also what you said is correct , they should covert and then marry. Perfect. Now go 2 years forward and consider that the modifications that you are asking in HMA are done.

Even then if the mama and bhanji elope , convert , and marry , who on EARTH can prove them illegal? Note that even with the changes in HMa you are asking , it would be applicable to the couple AT the time of marriage. But if they had converted earlier then the HMA is not applicable. Kapil was precisely hitting on this flaw that would exist and nobody cared to think on it.

Apologies again for jumping in without reading everything!

Regards, Anil

 

[anilsinghd]

In RatnaKheda Sirsa, a mama eloped with his Bhanji.
They are in Police custody now.

Kapil -
How will court decide in their case that custom doesn't permit this?
What if they will say that they want to follow the Exception provided to South Indians?

Judges come with their own biases.

They are not neutral.


If the court was made up of Jat judges, they would not give a decision against Jat custom.

A panel of judges , made up judges from a community where Sa Gothra marriage is permitted will not give a judgment against their norms.

What was the make up here?

The norm is 'Jiski Lathi uske Bhains!'

Dear Ravi,

Do not believe what you are trying to say is good for the people , nation at large. Even if you put all the judges as Jats , I EXPECT the same judgement else there is a bias which is uncalled for. Lets not mix things , Judiciary is not for making laws , its the parliamentarians job.


I hope and wish your above words were more out of despair than in suggestion sense.

Thanks and Regards, Anil

 

[ravichaudhary]

Dear Ravi,

Do not believe what you are trying to say is good for the people , nation at large. [Even if you put all the judges as Jats , I EXPECT the same judgement else there is a bias which is uncalled for Lets not mix things , Judiciary is not for making laws , its the parliamentarians job.


I hope and wish your above words were more out of despair than in suggestion sense.

Thanks and Regards, Anil

Agreed.

The point is that Bias will still be there.

You will not , however much you try, eliminate the cultural bias that is inherent in the person (judge)

Going before a South Indian judge, who goes in for mama- Bhanji marriage as a first preference, will be testing his cultural bias quite severely, if we ask him to rule that the marraige is unacceptable.

In other words, the judge will interpret the law, with some of his biases showing.

It is a rare person who can rise above his cultural biases.

Better to accept that there is bias, rather the pretend it is not there.

Ravi Chaudhary

 

[kapdal]

Agreed.

The point is that Bias will still be there.

You will not , however much you try, eliminate the cultural bias that is inherent in the person (judge)

Going before a South Indian judge, who goes in for mama- Bhanji marriage as a first preference, will be testing his cultural bias quite severely, if we ask him to rule that the marraige is unacceptable.

In other words, the judge will interpret the law, with some of his biases showing.

It is a rare person who can rise above his cultural biases.

Better to accept that there is bias, rather the pretend it is not there.

Ravi Chaudhary

I'd generally agree that everyone has personal biases and judges are not immune from it. However, there are several sources of bias- political leaning, educational background, personal experiences, peer group, to name a few. Afterall, we have seen here examples of Jat journalists and activists who are vocal against Jat customs. What bias do they have? It is naive to assume a bias based solely on region and caste without taking into account other factors- which makes it dangerous to predict the bias.

Judges have to be more careful, lest the accusations of bias impedes their professional progress. Then there are in built checks and balances in the system with several levels of appeal. It is highly improbable that all the judges you encounter would be biased, even if you assume a very high probability of bias for a randomly selected judge.

Finally, judges don't really have that much room for interpretation. The cases where the judges are called to interpret the law may be more high profile, but they are few and far between. In most cases, the question of law is very clear, and all the judge has to do is to examine the evidence and decide if it is sufficient or not. I'd say that the accusations of bias occasionaly stem from our own bias. For example, the case mentioned here, I don't see how the law can be interpreted differently by any judge, as the law is clear on when the mama-bhanji marriage is legal and when void. If a South Indian judge is accused of bias based on an obvious decision that any other judge would also give; then the accusation is biased and not the judge.

 

[sjakhars]

All right! Lets move forward. We can discuss the biases/priorities as long as we want. As I said earlier, human behavior can not be 100% objective, it is the degree and direction of subjectivity which tells how much biased a person is?

I am writing this post as a normal member and not as an Administrator/Moderator. This is completely my personal opinion.

We have been beating around the bush for so long. We have opinion of 120 members in form of voting. We have 35 pages of discussion which means there are 684+ responses to this thread. There are almost 21000 views recorded on this thread. We can keep it going for next months or years but we will not be able to convince 100% people in favor or against it. Quoting months old posts and bringing the thread back to square is not goint to take us anywhere. Often we raed comments that Jatland discussions do not reach to any conclusions. Here we have a chance to be more focused, more goal-centered as members have expressed their views in form of voting.

My apologies if I have hurt anyone in any way.

 

[sjakhars]

RE: Draft amendment

The idea behind the demanded amendment is to extend the definition of prohibited relationship to same gotra and same village marital relationship. The HMA has already defined "sapinda relationship". With our demand, we want same gotra marriage and same village marriages to be included in the same. There are many hurdles to it for sure and it will not happen in next couple of weeks or months. It will take a long time and still it may not happen or may happen partially like same gotra relationship can be included but not the same village relationship.

Jats are the first to raise this issue and I think Jats should lead other castes having same customs and traditions in this regard. There will be a huge debate over it in the group of experts/standing committee before even it is tabled in the parliament. Parliament usually does not have much discussion as the standing committee recommendations are accepted. The amendment will have a couple of sentences in the actual act but the interpretation will be exclusive by the lawyers and Judges.
What we need to do beforehand is to discuss it within us at Jatland, within Jats as community and then we take it to other communities where we have the same customs. It is not an easy task, it is not a one or 2 days task, this is the reason I said we need to move forward.

I would again invite experts to bring their knowledge and experience here. Let's have a discussion now on the draft of the amendment as we have discussed the need of it for so long. Jatland members have given their verdict with 91% votes. It is now the turn of the experts and specialists in the area to bring the demanded amendment in form of "words". We need to form those couple of sentences which will be in the HMA. Once we agree within Jats, then only we can share and get views from other castes.

Very good suggestions came in from Hemant Hooda Ji and Vipin Jyani Ji. If we can form a draft then it can be taken to khap meetings with our statistics like number of responses, number of views and the voting results by our senior and elder members.


Regards.

 

[vijay]

All right! Lets move forward. We can discuss the biases/priorities as long as we want.

We have been beating around the bush for so long. We have opinion of 120 members in form of voting. We have 35 pages of discussion which means there are 684+ responses to this thread. There are almost 21000 views recorded on this thread. We can keep it going for next months or years but we will not be able to convince 100% people in favor or against it. Quoting months old posts and bringing the thread back to square is not goint to take us anywhere. Often we raed comments that Jatland discussions do not reach to any conclusions. Here we have a chance to be more focused, more goal-centered as members have expressed their views in form of voting.

As per my conclusions,

1. Most of the Jatland members DO NOT support same gotra marriage and that was evident even before this thread was started.

2. Most of the Jatland members are in favor of amendment in HMA. Apart from self-proclaimed virtual picture of better cultured next generations, nobody provided any practical and feasible grounds to make it happen. Valid points raised by members are shouted down by extremists with all type of languages and termed as bashing.

Any other conclusions ?

 

[sanjaymalik]

The idea behind the demanded amendment is to extend the definition of prohibited relationship to same gotra and same village marital relationship. The HMA has already defined "sapinda relationship". With our demand, we want same gotra marriage and same village marriages to be included in the same. There are many hurdles to it for sure and it will not happen in next couple of weeks or months. It will take a long time and still it may not happen or may happen partially like same gotra relationship can be included but not the same village relationship.

Jats are the first to raise this issue and I think Jats should lead other castes having same customs and traditions in this regard. There will be a huge debate over it in the group of experts/standing committee before even it is tabled in the parliament. Parliament usually does not have much discussion as the standing committee recommendations are accepted. The amendment will have a couple of sentences in the actual act but the interpretation will be exclusive by the lawyers and Judges.
What we need to do beforehand is to discuss it within us at Jatland, within Jats as community and then we take it to other communities where we have the same customs. It is not an easy task, it is not a one or 2 days task, this is the reason I said we need to move forward.

I would again invite experts to bring their knowledge and experience here. Let's have a discussion now on the draft of the amendment as we have discussed the need of it for so long. Jatland members have given their verdict with 91% votes. It is now the turn of the experts and specialists in the area to bring the demanded amendment in form of "words". We need to form those couple of sentences which will be in the HMA. Once we agree within Jats, then only we can share and get views from other castes.

Very good suggestions came in from Hemant Hooda Ji and Vipin Jyani Ji. If we can form a draft then it can be taken to khap meetings with our statistics like number of responses, number of views and the voting results by our senior and elder members.


Regards.

As per my opinion there need to insert a single & simple clause (VA) within section 5 of HMA, wherein condition for solomization of marriage has been given-

5. Conditions for a Hindu marriage.- A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:-

(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;

(ii) neither party is an idiot or a lunatic at the time of the marriage;

(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of eighteen years and the bride the age of fifteen years at the time of the marriage;

(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(VA) the parties are not from the same gotras or either of self gotra or either's mother gotra or same village,unless the custom or usage govering each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

(vi) where the bride has not completed the age of eighteen years, the consent of her guardian in marriage, if any, has been obtained for the marriage.

Jhakhar saab, not an expert but have tried to give my opinion as far as concern about draft.

 

[vijay]

As per my opinion there need to insert a single & simple clause (VA) within section 5 of HMA, wherein condition for solomization of marriage has been given-

5. Conditions for a Hindu marriage.- A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:-

(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;

(ii) neither party is an idiot or a lunatic at the time of the marriage;

(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of eighteen years and the bride the age of fifteen years at the time of the marriage;

(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(VA) the parties are not from the same gotras or either of self gotra or either's mother gotra or same village,unless the custom or usage govering each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

(vi) where the bride has not completed the age of eighteen years, the consent of her guardian in marriage, if any, has been obtained for the marriage.

Jhakhar saab, not an expert but have tried to give my opinion as far as concern about draft.

Many flaws in the proposed draft, but pointing out would be termed as bashing.

 

[sjakhars]

As per my conclusions,

1. Most of the Jatland members DO NOT support same gotra marriage and that was evident even before this thread was started.

I will ask you a personal question and want to inform you that you are not included in above mentioned "most of the Jatland members". You haven't even said if you suppurt same gotra marriage or not? So for you, any conslucion doesn't matter as you haven't got any conclusion, any stand from your side. Now, you would ask the ridiculous question of voting has come up again. Yes, it has. You may not believe in voting, if that is the case than We will not force you, just say that you do not believe in voting which is a basic tool of democracy.
I believe in straight questions and answers. I may or may not agree with your answers but I will rspect your straight answers. I look forward to get staright answers to straight questions.

With your above conclusion, if you think it was/is waste of time discussing this issue then you can resist yourself participating because some people may find this issue worth discussing.

My apologies if I hurt you but I could not resist myself.

2. Most of the Jatland members are in favor of amendment in HMA. Apart from self-proclaimed virtual picture of better cultured next generations, nobody provided any practical and feasible grounds to make it happen. Valid points raised by members are shouted down by extremists with all type of languages and termed as bashing.

Any other conclusions ?

That is where I am trying to direct this thread Vijay. It's better to move ahead rather than bashing/discussing the same thing again and again. Not all people have the sophisticated communication skills to voice their opinion. We can ask people to be more polite but can not just ridicule their opinion due to lack of sophisticated language communication skills. Some people know the art to put a sour pill in a sugar coat and some don't. I myself have used the word bashing not because I wanted to disrespcet someone but to stress the extreme opinion of some people about certain things/matters. We hear a single bad word about an organization/opinon/system and go all loud calling whole system/opinion/organization by names.

I have given a group of words and tried to bring out our intended goal while striving for the amendment. I am no law expert but someone has to give it a start and I thought why not me? All members are welcome to voice their agreement/disagreement/suggestions.

Who are those self-proclaiemd, better cultured next generations? They are here at Jatland and they are Jats, it's our responsibility to try to convince them, to give them a definite criteria to bring out their apprehensions/anxieties and if they are not convinced then respect their opinion. But definitely, we can not ignore opinion of majority of people here. It is democracy, everybody is entitled to voice their opinion but the issue can not hijakced by a small minority.

I have raised my anxieties about derailment of this thread when its trying to be more focused, goal-centered.

 

[sjakhars]

No, it won't be, just put forward your thoughts. Every criticism is not bashing, bashing is repetetive criticism without reasons. Don't be apprehensive. This is the sole intention of all this effort. Bring out your anxities. People will try to resolve them. This is your chance to put forward your apprehensions.

We are moving in right direction.

Tell us, what flaws do you see in above draft from Sanjay Ji.

Many flaws in the proposed draft, but pointing out would be termed as bashing.

 

[akshaymalik84]

Many flaws in the proposed draft, but pointing out would be termed as bashing.

Let us know the flaws in above proposal and what do you suggest.

 

[sanjaymalik]

Many flaws in the proposed draft, but pointing out would be termed as bashing.

Let them point out if you have any better draft, so as we can understand.

 

[vijay]

Let them point out if you have any better draft, so as we can understand.

Sure Sanjay !

Let me evaluate the possible flaws before posting in a hurry as i don't believe in just rejecting anything without any solid reasons.

 

[vijay]

I will ask you a personal question and want to inform you that you are not included in above mentioned "most of the Jatland members". You haven't even said if you suppurt same gotra marriage or not? So for you, any conslucion doesn't matter as you haven't got any conclusion, any stand from your side. Now, you would ask the ridiculous question of voting has come up again. Yes, it has. You may not believe in voting, if that is the case than We will not force you, just say that you do not believe in voting which is a basic tool of democracy.
I believe in straight questions and answers. I may or may not agree with your answers but I will rspect your straight answers. I look forward to get staright answers to straight questions.

With your above conclusion, if you think it was/is waste of time discussing this issue then you can resist yourself participating because some people may find it this issue worth discussing.

My apologies if I hurt you but I could not resist myself.

My stand is simple, straight forward and quite evident since the day first when we started discussing.
Let me repeat it again, if someone didn't read my countless posts on this issue :

I DO NOT support same gotra marriage.
I Never opposed if people want to go for amendment in HMA but i believe that amendment in HMA CAN NOT fix this problem.

Not all people have the sophisticated communication skills to voice their opinion. We can ask people to be more polite but can not just ridicule their opinion due to lack of sophisticated language communication skills. Some people know the art to put a sour pill in a sugar coat and some don't. I myself have used the word bashing not because I wanted to disrespcet someone but to stress the extreme opinion of some people about certain things/matters.

Its not about the communication skills but its all about respecting the others point of views irrespective of the language skills.

Who are those self-proclaiemd, better cultured next generations?

I think you took me wrong here. What i want to say is ...... People have self-proclaimed theories that amendment in HMA would fix everything and our next generation would be better cultured.

 

[sjakhars]

Thank you Vijay. Now, it's crystal clear to me at least. I have misunderstood your opinion on same gotra marriage and HMA amendment. Please accept my apologies.
I partially accept your opinion that the amendment in HMA can not fix the problem. My opinion in this issue is, It will help us in fixing the problem, may not be 100% but to a great extent. I opine that law can be enforced but social custom can not be but at the same time, laws are derived from social and moral customs/values or in other words, laws are modified versions of social customs/traditions and moral values so why not put our principal customs as a law. It will be enforced on Jats as we are asking for it. If other castes want to come with us, under this law, they are most welcome.

My apologies again not getting your point about "self-claimed....." paragraph in your post. If our next generations are not going to be better cultured, we can't do much other than trying. If the people who made murder a legal offence have thought in the same way as people won't be changed after the article 302 in Indian Constitution than we wouldn't have had that article. All the murders haven't stopped after this article but it doesn't mean that we discard this article. Killing someone is a moral and social offence first and then it is a legal crime.

Thanks again Vijay.

My stand is simple, straight forward and quite evident since the day first when we started discussing.
Let me repeat it again, if someone didn't read my countless posts on this issue :

I DO NOT support same gotra marriage.
I Never opposed if people want to go for amendment in HMA but i believe that amendment in HMA CAN NOT fix this problem.





Its not about the communication skills but its all about respecting the others point of views irrespective of the language skills.




I think you took me wrong here. What i want to say is ...... People have self-proclaimed theories that amendment in HMA would fix everything and our next generation would be better cultured.

 

[fateh]

Many flaws in the proposed draft, but pointing out would be termed as bashing.

MR Vijay, I am an Advocate & fortunately I got an opportunity to draft amendments to the NCC Act & Rules, the present NCC Act & Rule not only amended but I was responsible to get the amendments approved by the parliament, for about 4 years I learnt lot. With my knowledge & experience of such matters, I find draft amendment suggested by mr malik is short, suitable & meets our requirement without effecting or encroching others rights/fields, however, if some points are left or voilate the constitution or any basic law or some areas has been left uncovered by mr malik, please do come out without any hasitation & delay. regards

 

[virj]

Let them point out if you have any better draft, so as we can understand.

Sanjay there cannot be any flaw basically as this is what we want and this is what khaps are demanding. There can only be suggestions to make it look better. I mean better words thats all.

Basically we want amendment for Same Gotra and Same village and thats exactly what khaps are demanding.

Lets not discuss again whether there are flaws in amendment demand itself or not as we have left them far behind. Now look like most if not all at least agree to one point that we want amendment or looks like noone oppose amendment. There are no questions about Same Gotra but yes same village can be discussed briefly, if someone want, as Fateh ji has pointed earlier. Jakhar ji has put paranthesis about villages. Does anyone has objection to it? If not that can be included as it is in our draft.

Lets take a step ahead : Prepare the draft as u did. Thanks

Next step : Suggest how to make it looks comprehensive and better.

After this lets extend our support to khaps as I mentioned earlier.

 

[sjakhars]

Thank you Sanjay Ji. You are an expert. I no nothing still I tried to put my nose in your area of expertise.
My intention was to get people like you to come forward and tell us, what needs to be added/deleted/amended in HMA to get marrige in same gotra and same village prohibited, that same has been given by you.

As per my opinion there need to insert a single & simple clause (VA) within section 5 of HMA, wherein condition for solomization of marriage has been given-

5. Conditions for a Hindu marriage.- A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:-

(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;

(ii) neither party is an idiot or a lunatic at the time of the marriage;

(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of eighteen years and the bride the age of fifteen years at the time of the marriage;

(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(VA) the parties are not from the same gotras or either of self gotra or either's mother gotra or same village,unless the custom or usage govering each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

(vi) where the bride has not completed the age of eighteen years, the consent of her guardian in marriage, if any, has been obtained for the marriage.

Jhakhar saab, not an expert but have tried to give my opinion as far as concern about draft.

 

[kapdal]

As per my opinion there need to insert a single & simple clause (VA) within section 5 of HMA, wherein condition for solomization of marriage has been given-

5. Conditions for a Hindu marriage.- A marriage may be solemnized between any two Hindus, if the following conditions are fulfilled, namely:-

(i) neither party has a spouse living at the time of the marriage;

(ii) neither party is an idiot or a lunatic at the time of the marriage;

(iii) the bridegroom has completed the age of eighteen years and the bride the age of fifteen years at the time of the marriage;

(iv) the parties are not within the degrees of prohibited relationship, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(v) the parties are not sapindas of each other, unless the custom or usage governing each of them permits of a marriage between the two;

(VA) the parties are not from the same gotras or either of self gotra or either's mother gotra or same village,unless the custom or usage govering each of them permits of a marriage between the two.

(vi) where the bride has not completed the age of eighteen years, the consent of her guardian in marriage, if any, has been obtained for the marriage.

Jhakhar saab, not an expert but have tried to give my opinion as far as concern about draft.

It would be better to use the current version of HMA. Point (iii) is 21 years for boys and 18 years for girls in the current version. And there is no point (vi). The current version is here:
http://www.netlawman.co.in/acts/hindu-marriage-act-1955.php

The language "same gotras or either of self gotra or either's mother gotra" should be precise as same gotra and self gotra are same things. Use of both is confusing. Might make more sense to use a single word "sagotri" (Or whatever the right word is) to capture mother/father gotras the way Sapinda captures a lot of relationships. May be better to split the gotra and village in 2 different sub points.

In either case, Section 3 of the Act, "Definitions" would also have to be amended to precisely define "gotra" or "sagotri" (whatever is used) and "village". Definition of "village" should be there in any other act. Definition of gotra, as per wiki, is a lineage or clan assigned to a Hindu at birth. Not sure if that is appropriate or it needs to be more precise.

PS: This is a specific opinion on the draft and not on the need or efficacy of the proposed amendment.

PS2: For all those who want the amendment, the key issue should be the political strategy and arguments. Once you get the political will to an amendment in principle, the drafting, etc. are minor issues and there are lots of babus in secretriats who specialise in it.